Kraken Secures $22 Million Arbitration Award Against Auditor Mazars

By Patricia Miller

3 min read

Payward Inc. won a $22 million arbitration case against Mazars for abandoning Kraken's 2022 audit, impacting its regulatory relationships.

#What does the recent arbitration ruling mean for Kraken and its auditor?

The parent company of Kraken, Payward Inc., recently secured a $22 million arbitration award against its former auditor, Mazars USA. This victory stemmed from Mazars’ withdrawal from the 2022 financial audit just before its completion. Mazars had found no evidence of fraud or disagreements during its audit process, and this abrupt departure raised significant concerns about the company’s perceived integrity among regulators.

In a scenario reminiscent of a home inspector leaving a task unfinished, Payward was left needing to explain the situation to state regulators and banking partners, jeopardizing their money transmitter licenses.

#Why did Mazars exit the Kraken audit?

Mazars had been auditing Payward for three consecutive years with consistently clean opinions about its financial practices. However, following the SEC’s lawsuit against Kraken in November 2023, Mazars withdrew days later from its audit responsibilities for 2022. This unanticipated exit has led to what Payward characterized as an existential "licensing crisis," requiring them to allocate substantial legal resources to maintain regulatory relationships.

#What consequences did this ruling carry?

The arbitration ruling affirmed that Mazars’ unexpected departure resulted in measurable damages for Payward. A substantial portion of the $22 million award—amounting to $12.5 million—was directly linked to complications regarding Kraken's acquisition of TradeStation Crypto.

Payward’s co-CEO emphasized that the withdrawal from the audit was a significant setback, affecting their operations and relationships within the financial sector. Furthermore, the arbitration decision underscored the contractual nature of auditing obligations—indicating that auditors must fulfill their commitments regardless of external pressures, such as regulatory scrutiny.

#What implications does this have for the broader crypto auditing landscape?

The timing of Mazars’ withdrawal is particularly critical as it highlights a trend in the financial auditing sector, where firms are becoming increasingly cautious due to regulatory pressures. Mazars had previously retreated from providing audit services for Binance, illustrating a hesitancy among auditors to engage with crypto clients amid regulatory uncertainty.

When auditors abandon their responsibilities based on perceived regulatory risks rather than actual findings, it can create a negative spiral. Regulators interpret incomplete audits as indicative of potential issues, leading to increased scrutiny and challenging license renewals. This scenario puts firms in a difficult position and ultimately affects their operational stability.

The irony lies in the subsequent dismissal of the SEC charges against Kraken in March 2025, as it amplified the critical question of why Mazars stepped away from a client that had demonstrated clear operational integrity.

#How does this decision set a precedent for future audits?

The $22 million award is significant for its precedent rather than its immediate financial impact on Kraken. It is one of the first instances where a crypto company successfully held an auditor accountable for abandonment of service. In an industry striving for legitimacy and transparency, this ruling communicates a clear message that auditors who engage with clients must follow through to completion.

For other crypto companies, this case serves as an important reminder of the contractual obligations that come with audit agreements. The outcome may encourage auditors to maintain their relationships with crypto clients, even under regulatory scrutiny. A stable auditing environment could lead to better institutional relationships and smoother licensing processes in a market that still faces challenges sourcing willing auditors.

For Kraken, the enforcement of the arbitration ruling in Delaware indicates the company's intention to pursue the financial award. Given that the arbitration confirmed no wrongdoing by Kraken, this outcome enhances their credibility and could positively affect their future operations and market trust.

Important Notice And Disclaimer

This article does not provide any financial advice and is not a recommendation to deal in any securities or product. Investments may fall in value and an investor may lose some or all of their investment. Past performance is not an indicator of future performance.